And also terrorise the player at his house, if the press reports are true. Classy.

Ah, a Sun reader eh ! Just about sums you up.

Let's for argument's sake say that this turned out to be true , which I doubt given the 'source' , then it would have been the disgraceful act of a tiny minority.

But you seem to think that it reflects on the entire fan base and the club itself, which is a tad silly don't you think ?

It would be a bit like me labelling chelsea as a racist club based on recent events.

I have no probs whatsoever with Everton refusing to sell. He's there player.
But Martinez should stop coming out with so much crap. "We are looking after him".
Yeah I bet Stones is delighted about that ........

On the contrary, I do not read paper based media and if i did, i certainly would not lower myself to read that atrocious garbage.

It seems that the story has filtered through other media.

Most acts will be a "tiny minority", I would hardly expect 20,000 people at the door of Mr Stones so that Everton fans would be in a "majority".

A "tiny minority" Evertonians are racist, sexist & homophobic, but that would be true of any PL club.

as an everton fan, in my eyes if we had sold John it would have been a win win situation.

You would have got a player who wants to play Champions League.

We would have had loads of money, and could have rebuilt, our rather ageing squad

I agree. They should come out with:

We are happy to hold his career back, and preventing him securing his financial future, even though we have been offered an extraordinary amount of money - far more than the players true worth.

Perhaps, what they fail to mention, is that Everton still owe chelsea a large amount from the Lukaku transfer and that the fee paid for stones will only see them getting say £10m in actual money for the player. 5 million of which they will have to pass on through a sell-on clause to his previous club..

A sensible post.

I agree, it is time to move on. Perhaps we should have made approaches for Laporte earlier in the summer. His buyout clause is around €50m, not much more than we've offered for Stones. A classy young central defender with loads of potential, teamed up with Zouma it could have made a possibly great future partnership.

I don't like the sound of Garay from Zenit who we have been linked with. From what I gather he's even slower than JT ! Whoever we get has to have a bit of pace, or forget about playing with a higher line.

In today's market you would have got very little for your money, Not anyone that good anyway

Much less then what you was actually selling.

If he wanted to play Champions League football he should not have signed a contract with Everton.

utterly ridiculous even by your standards

Stop.

For your own sake just stop

We should offer this £37 million kitty for Verane and ask Everton to pay up what they owe us for previous deals.

You do love to just break contracts don't you?

Advise you never to set up your own business. Nobody would sign a contract with you

Are you saying that everton do not owe chelsea for the lukkaku fee?

And that a large amount of the £37 million proposed fee would be eaten away by that balance owed and the 20% sell on they would owe to Stones' previous club?

They would in effect only get a much reduced fee for the player, which is why they do not want to sell to chelsea and are clinging on to him.

Why is this ridiculous?

Because the two deals are separate.

One has nothing to do with the other.

The way our deals with Everton would be structured would be very different to the way Everton's deal with us would be structured.

This is not a deal done down the pub with a mate, "Forgot my wallet you buy the beers this week i get them next week".

They are not holding his career back nor have they turned down more then the players "true" worth. A player like any other product is worth whatever someone is willing to pay

Say Everton owe Chelsea £20 million

We offer £35million for their player, do you think Chelsea will pay them £35 million or pay them £15 million, (out of which 20% of £35m has to be paid by everton as a sell on clause).

?

More then likely neither

Their deals with us will be structured over a set amount of years and paid to us under certain condition's for example when a number of appearances have been made, A certain number of goals have been scored or maybe certain achievements. Our deals with them will also have a similar structure.

With the different finances of the clubs, Everton would want a bigger part of the fee paid up front while we would allow for a lower fee up front from any players bought from us.

Just because they gain extra money (from a sale from us or from anyone else) would not necessarily mean those deals would change.

Anyone picked up codeblue's toys that have been thrown out of the pram yet?


We should have moved on when they knocked back the £20m offer. When you consider what we paid for Zouma, who I rate higher, the money being offered for Stones is insane even with the so-called English tax.

The sensible thing would be to have alternative targets, but as we saw with Rooney a couple of years back it looks like the club may have put all their eggs in one basket again.



Why do they have to be already playing in the Premier League or English for that matter?

With our style of play and the current issues with defence I don't think we have time for someone to settle into the premiership way of play. Attacking players can come in and do a job if they good enough but I think defence is a totally different animal. At the moment we need a defender who can come in today and start on Saturday. For that I feel they need to be playing over here. An English defender is more likely to be able to do that then someone from another country although if we could find a non English defender that would be fine (although still would prefer English if possible) not only because they know the game but also we wont have to worry about them settling into life in England

Its all about shorting the risk from a pitch P.O.V. If they partnering either JT or Cahill the understanding might come quicker if they from England, If they partnering Zouma again I think they need some premiership experience as Zouma is very good but once in a while small things creep into his game that if he was alongside someone not use to our league might be costly.

Ah well, good job he's not a Champions league ref then eh?

Mourinho may have a point;

..... here is the flight mileages to the group games with the 'totals' showing the overall distance including return ,...... Chelsea top the list!

UEFA must really love Bayern Munich.

Chelsea: Kiev 1316, Porto 820, Tel Aviv 2200,.......... total 8672 miles.
R.Madrid: Paris 654, Skaktar 2095, Malmo 1295,........ total 8088 miles.
PSG: Madrid 654, Skaktar 1608, Malmo 647;........total 5818 miles.
Arsenal: Bayern 570, Olympiakos 1485, Zagreb 830;........total 5770 miles
Barcelona: Leverkusen 704, Roma 533, Borisov 1495,......total 5464 miles.
M.Utd: Eindhoven 353, Moscow 1579, Wolfsburg 546,....... total 4956 miles.
M.City: Juve 731, Sevilla 1126ml,Gladbach 410ml,.......... total 4534 miles
Bayern: Arsenal 570, Olympiakos 924, Zagreb 262,.......total 3512 miles

Someone took that post seriously??

I think even with the extra travelling it's panned out quite well for us. The group should be a walk in the park if we're on our game, but also the way the fixtures have worked out is quite good. For example our longest away trip (Tel Aviv) isn't until matchday 5 - there's a chance we may have already qualified by then. And our PL game that follows it is against Spurs on the Sunday…. they will have been playing in Ajerbaijan that week also.

Quite right, it’s an outrage;

....Mourinho needs to take those flight mileage stats to ‘The European Courts of Justice’; it needs sorting.

So not content with getting one of the easiest possible draws, you now want an easy draw AND no travelling. Entitlement and victimhood at the same time.